Thanks for that interesting post. Interesting to get a view from inside Sikh culture.

I think what you say is essentially true. Sikhs make lots of compromises over their religion – just as Christians, Jews and Muslims do – nothing unusual with that. Most Christians don’t really believe that they will go to Hell for harbouring desires for people who aren’t their spouses.
Most Jews don’t follow absolutely every dietary and behavioural restriction to be found in Judaism. Most Muslims in the UK don’t do the full prayer five times a day every day and most Muslim men actually wear tight fitting western clothes (also against their religion).

The idea that they won’t be prepared to compromise with a secular approach to public life and equal citizenship in a country like the UK is doubtful in the extreme.

It’s interesting that you say there is still a great hunger to migrate to the UK – despite the recent economic success of India.

Immigration to the UK by Sikhs – There are Sikhs lined up and waiting desperately to immigrate to your country. A young Sikh man who is wasting his life in his farm in Punjab without money, job, future or real happiness will be willing to cut off his entire left arm in return to get an opportunity to immigrate to a White Country. But once they get a second life, some of these same Sikhs who were ready to cut their left arm don’t want to cut their religious symbols in Public places.

My main point is not support for Whites, or to criticize my religion, my main point is that selfish bastards in my community do not realize that this behavior is only spoiling the prospects of other needy Sikhs the opportunity to immigrate to the UK .

Desire to keep the 5 k’s. – Almost every Sikh breaks these religious laws. Of the 5 K’s the Kesh ( hair and beard, eyebrows, body hair ) is shorn by a massive ( maybe 99 %, yes 99 % ) majority of the young Sikhs, weather they are in the UK or the fields of Punjab . Even the Sikhs who keep the hair will reject 3 other physical symbols. For convenience sake – without batting an eyelid. Ask a typically foolish and religious Sikh, – if you take so much trouble over maintaining your hair at the right length, do you keep ‘the Kacha’ ( large undergarment / drawers ) or do you wear a Calvein Klein brand of underwear. Do you keep ‘the Kanga’ ( comb ) of the right length or only a miniature Kanga – for convenience sake ? The ‘Kara’ is convenient so almost everyone ( including I ) wear it.

Desire to maintain identity – Strictly my viewpoint, and it can be rejected but I have seen in India that those Sikhs who have very little achievements to their credit, try to attract attention to themselves and pump up their fragile egos by this display of religious identity ( again – only Kesh and Kara ) by saying – “look I am a true blue Sikh, I am better than you. You cannot achieve this.

Refusal to reciprocate to decency. – Sikhs refuse to understand that they have a very good life in the UK . The British are basically good hosts. Do the Sikhs realize how their fellowmen are treated in the Gulf, were treated in Uganda , or would be treated if they made demands in say – China ?

A rule is a rule. If the Sikh cannot obey the rule, buy him a one way ticket. See how quickly the swine will come to his / her senses. The problem is also in British society, by being politically correct to the point of being apologetic, and by giving in to a few fanatics. It is the British only who are creating a situation where they will have to continuously satisfy the demands of fools and ingrates.

1. I thought you were in favour of religious toleration. Not when it comes to occultism it seems.

2. I have not evaded the question of disestablishment of the Anglican Church. I said I support its disestablishment. I support my child becoming independent of me one day. Doesn’t mean that when the moment comes there won’t be some feelings of regret and sadness.

3. Yet again you refuse to say where you would draw the line:

Do you draw the line at

Bangle.

Hijab

Full Burka

Full Burka plus relative to act as chaperone.

Female child not being allowed to attend mixed school beyond
puberty?

This is a perfectly valid question. I want to find out where you draw the line with specific examples not some airy-fairy “as long as it doesn’t intrude too much” nonsense. Of course the wearing of a bangle intrudes. It might not intrude on you but it intrudes on other Sikh girls who then have to ask themselves whether they should wear a bangle as well, to show they are true Sikhs. And it intrudes because it immediately introduces the question of whether male Sikhs should be allowed to carry the sword/dagger which is a requirement of their religion.

4. Today I spoke with two teachers who raised the issue – not me. They were clearly concerned about the ruling and what it would lead to. From bangle to Burka is a but a short step seemed to be their message. So I think you must be including a large section of the teaching profession in the circle of “collective paranoia”.

5. You are essentially burying your head in the sand. You clearly rule out of court the idea that anyone should ever be allowed to entertain any strongly negative feelings towards a religion. Why ever not? People are allowed to hate Nazism, Communism, American Imperialism, Thatcherism. Why can’t they despise a religion that wants to reduce them to the status of second class citizens.

6. You need to educate yourself in what Islam as an ideology consists of. Only then once you have familiarised yourself with the Koran, the Hadith, the teachings of the main Islamic schools and the curricula in Islamic religious schools (both formal and informal) can you dismiss concerns about allowing religious symbolism to intrude on public life as part of a paranoid reaction. Of course, if you do read up on the subject and can show that Islam does not wish to dominate the world, has full respect for non-Muslims, does not want to institute Shariah, does not view women as inferior and does not wish to treat non-Muslims as second class citizens, then that will be an interesting development. I’ll certainly look at the evidence you bring forward. But I’m not prepared to take any lectures based on no more than wishful thinking.

“No-one should understimate the determination of a teenage Sikh to do her own thing. I’ve seen “Bend it like Beckham”. ”

Not sure if you are satirising the tendency of film makers to fashion the world as they would like it to be. In films just about ALL Muslim and Sikh girls are feisty, just as all Black people are law abiding and erudite,
all women excel at male-dominated jobs, and all lawyers and doctors are principled persons unconcerned with financial reward.

But then they seem to think Father Christmas really exists, six year olds can defeat adult burglars, animals can talk and Steve Martin is still funny.

“JP posts from a Catholic perspective.”

Um, no. I’m Catholic and JP certainly does not speak for me; indeed it is difficult to see how he speaks for anyone other than himself.

*****

Did I say “the” Catholic perspective? No. I did not. I said “a”. I am well aware that there is a range of opinion within the Catholic Church. Some of us remembering John Paul II’s quixotic gesture of kissing the Koran.

Actually “kissing the Koran” is a nice phrase to describe Dhimmi-style appeasement. I prefer the current Pope, whose well chosen quotation so enraged followers of Islam.

Meanwhile all over the Muslim world everyday Muslim clerics describe Christianity, Judaism and Western culture in the vilest terms. And for some reason, the bien pensants of the world seem to find that perfectly acceptable.

morgoth is an occulist, a one time follow of Aleister Crowley, if you don’t consider that to be an issue then I have to wonder why? (please look him up)

frankly, your evasions, and difficulty with the rather simple question of the disestablishment of the Church of England, suggests to me that your motivation is questionable

where do I draw the line? I think there are many helpful and pragmatic solutions to these very, very minor issues

I think that people who get worked up about them display either:

intolerance to others, ignorance, or their own agenda

I don’t, cos I am basically a pluralist I accept that people will have different views from me, some that I don’t like, and as long as they don’t intrude too much I can’t get too worked up.

To suggest that wearing a bangle in school is some big issue strikes me as utterly irrational.

As far as I can see, to adopt your, morgoth or JP’s attitude on these issue would be:

1) to play into the hands of extremists
2) to stir up racist strife
3) authoritarian

which obviously I can’t go along with, honestly, your collective paranoia worries me more than school kids and dress codes.

finally, I don’t find engaging with Muslim haters, baiters or the paranoid to be useful, so forgive me if I ignore you (and others) in the future.

JP posts from a Catholic perspective.

Um, no. I’m Catholic and JP certainly does not speak for me; indeed it is difficult to see how he speaks for anyone other than himself.

You are dodging the question. I ask you where you draw the line. Either you do draw a line between the religious and the secular or you don’t. If you do – and it would appear you do – then you have to say where you draw the line. It’s not good enough to just say we have to make an accommodation with people’s beliefs. Of course you do, that’s what any society has to do. Even Stalin’s Russia tolerated a degree of religious observance.

Where do you draw the line? For instance, should a female Muslim be allowed to wear a full Burka at work in say a government office interacting with the public? From all that you have said, I presume you see nothing wrong with that.

As for disestablishment of the Church, sadly yes. That is an inevitable result of where we are now. I say sadly because I do value history and tradition and, although I am a secularist, I can see that a religious connection can enrich societies. If I lived in some Spanish town I wouldn’t want to stop festa days for the local patron saint.

However, we have now reached the point where the existence of an established Church threatens our culture. It is in many ways being used as a Trojan horse to import Shariah into this country.

On JP and Morgoth, I respect both posters. The Catholic Church is an incredible institution that has done much to enrich our culture over the centuries. Since it stopped being an anti-democratic institution, I welcome it as an ally of civilised society. JP posts from a Catholic perspective. Catholics have every right to be suspicious of what Islam has in store for it if it ever gets political power.

Morgoth is an extremist. But then he appears to be a polytheist and strict Muslims who adhere to traditional Islamic teaching wish to summarily execute or enslave polytheists. He has a right to be concerned. How you view his posts depends if you think extremism in defence of liberty is a vice. Morgoth puts the Islamic threat to our society on a par with the Nazi threat. It sounds extreme, but then when one looks at what Islam (as an ideology, as expounded by its clerics) means to do, I think one is justified in making the comparison.

I think rather than analysing everyone’s motivation for posting you would do better to address the specific points made by posters AND tell us what policies you think should be followed, in particular where YOU draw the line on this issue of preventing religious life from intruding into the public sphere.